UFO Religions

Archive for the ‘ET and Evolution’ Category

The Uncommon Descent blog reports that “in the planetary science journal, Icarus, two scientists argue that the genetic code bears the hallmarks of an intelligent cause.” The blog quotes the abstract which reads in part:

It has been repeatedly proposed to expand the scope for SETI, and one of the suggested alternatives to radio is the biological media. Genomic DNA is already used on Earth to store non-biological information. Though smaller in capacity, but stronger in noise immunity is the genetic code.

Kind of interesting — an intelligent design high-five but using that to promote intelligent ET life . . . intelligent designers instead of an intelligent Designer.

Where have you heard that before?

Hmmmm … It’ll come to me any minute now.

The full scientific paper can be downloaded here.

Technorati Tags: design, designers, DNA, extraterrestrials, intelligent, Panspermia

I just read this piece from the space.com website: “Are Earthlings from Mars?” The post begins this way:

It’s possible that the family tree of all life on Earth has its roots on Mars — and a new device could put that theory to the test in a few years, researchers say.

Researchers are developing an instrument that would search through samples of Martian dirt, isolating any genetic material from microbes that might be present — bugs that are living or that died relatively recently, within the last million years or so. Scientists could then use standard biochemical techniques to analyze any resulting genetic sequences, comparing them to what we find on Earth.

Sounds interesting, to say the least, but the MIT researcher working on the device already seems to sense it won’t solve anything when it comes to the panspermia issue. His frank admission: “[I]f we go to Mars and find life that’s related to us, we could have originated on Mars. Or if it started here, it could have been transferred to Mars.” So, in other words, if we find a genetic relationship, we haven’t found in which direction it worked. This is a classic panspermia dilemma. The same presumed mechanisms (e.g., meteorites, solar wind) that could have brought Martian microbes here to kickstart life on earth in the evolutionary model could just have well worked the other way.

But still, it’s a pretty interesting research trajectory.

Technorati Tags: device, DNA, earth, humans, life, Mars, martians, Panspermia

In another blow to the “junk DNA is vestigial extraterrestrial DNA that proves aliens made us” buffoonery, Science Daily recently posted an overview of a new scientific paper in the peer-reviewed journal Genome Biology that demonstrates that junk DNA is (wait for it) not junk (and certainly not alien). Science Daily notes:

Over a decade after sequencing the human genome, it has now become clear that the genome is not mostly ‘junk’ as previously thought. In fact, the ENCODE project consortium of dozens of labs and petabytes of data have determined that these ‘noncoding’ regions house everything from disease trait loci to important regulatory signals, all the way through to new types of RNA-based genes.

I’ve added this piece to my archive on junk DNA not being junk. I don’t know whether to hope the ancient alien crowd finally grasps the science here and moves on to invent other nonsense . . . or not. What comes next might feature logic even more tortured than this.

Technorati Tags: aliens, biology, creation, DNA, extraterrestrial, humans, junk

I saw Prometheus last night. Instead of enjoying the drive home with my head filled with appreciation for a provocative, inventive retelling of the ancient astronaut myth, my mind busied itself on how many ways I could mock this under-achieving, unimaginative bore of a film for my UFO Religions readers. In one sentence: the History Channel produces better science fiction than this movie. Or perhaps: Prometheus: In Space, No One Can Hear You Snore.

It’s honestly difficult to express how poor of an effort I consider this film. It’s kind of like reviewing a Sitchin book:  I can find see problems everywhere, so where to begin?

Let’s start with some generalities. While I was in line I overheard someone who had just seen the movie say, “It was good, but it was no Alien.” I only agree with the second half of that assessment. This was not a good movie. There were no surprises at all; predictability in a sci-fi movie is unforgivable. After all, if you are at liberty to detach yourself from reality and you still manage to be banal, you’re project is a failure. Given the hype, this was an historic entertainment FAIL. Let me go back to this year’s box office mega-implosion John Carter (but not the last Indiana Jones movie — that was criminal; Prometheus was merely inept). Honestly, how can anyone fail to be stimulating in any way when it comes to the ancient astronaut mythology? But that is Prometheus: one groggy, dull ride. Basically the problem is that the movie begins with the core Sitchin / von Daniken nonsense talking point, that humans were created by aliens, and just stops right there. It adds nothing. No development of the idea into a clever meta-narrative. If you already have had the thought that human life was created by aliens planted in your mind (thinking it stupid or not), there’s no need to see the movie. It literally doesn’t take you an inch farther. Just a two-hour reminder of the one basic point that everyone going to the movie already had in their head because of the internet, the Ancient Aliens sitcom, or Coast to Coast AM. A quintessential example of what it means to be uncreative. Sort of like the cinematic antonym to either of the Sherlock Holmes movies.

But the real insult was to the Alien franchise. Was it worse than Alien 3 or 4? Hard to say. Those misguided sequels just enraged viewers or made them say to themselves, “Thanks for destroying the best things about the first two movies.” This one doesn’t ruin anything because it doesn’t convey anything. It’s just an intellectually stultifying bore. The first two Alien movies were great because they were filled with clever surprises and truly edge-of-the-seat suspense. This offering had neither. It didn’t even try to surprise. The film unfailingly tipped viewers off to what (I guess) were supposed to be later revelations (the old gazzillionare was on the ship and the “remind us why this character is in the movie”  played by Charlize Theron is his daughter; one of humanity’s alien creators is still alive on the planet; the cavernous structure the crew discovers is a spaceship; the ship is filled with the alien muck that spawns the killing machine alien in the original film; etc. I don’t consider these plot spoilers, because unless you’re still thinking about the commercials you were forced to watch before the film started, you can’t miss these “plot” elements. They are transparent and completely expected.To give a specific example of how Prometheus does something badly that Alien would have done more more cleverly, the robot (David) plops some of the alien DNA/egg-stuff into the drink of a crew member, knowing that the unfortunate guy will become host to the alien. I say “plop” because there’s actually a loud plopping sound in the film after David pours the drink and leans his finger over the edge of the cup. It sounded like a large ice cube was tossed into the glass. If the moron who took the drink couldn’t hear that like the rest of us, he deserved what he got. Alien would have found a far more sinister and surreptitious way of infecting the guy — and not letting it be known to the viewer until much later. It would have been something you felt in your gut but couldn’t figure out how it was done. The whole movie was like that (Ridley Scott: “The audience needs to understand what happens in the scene after this one, so we’ll drop a breadcrumb the size of a Toyota in their path since we can’t think of an adroit way to keep moving”).

You get the idea. This film has sucked enough of my life away, so the review stops here. I need to move on.

Technorati Tags: movie, prometheus, review, Ridley Scott

Readers who follow the panspermia discussion in science outlets aimed at the non-specialist may find the recent news release / article from Science Daily of interest: “Organic Carbon from Mars, but not Biological.” Close, but no cigar. A biological outcome would certainly have added fodder to the panspermia theory.

Technorati Tags: biological, carbon, Mars, Panspermia